The Catholic Message Board

Posted: **Mon Feb 02, 2026 12:55 pm**

I am not going to be dragged in to a pm conversation over the Poem to the Man God or anything else so please stop sending them to me.

Frankly I stopped reading when you claimed to be the first and only member to bring this up. Perhaps you are unaware that though this board may appear relatively new it is the I think 4th (original-"new board"-Ave Maria Radio era-now this one) home this community has had. It's been about 30 years that many of us have been together. Unfortunately much of our history is gone, so maybe you didn't know (though I do believe I mention it in the Welcome thread....)

Anyhoo...I stand by what I said. We have btdt on this subject and are not interested in it.

Thanks,
Zeno

Posted: **Mon Feb 02, 2026 3:19 pm**

And the number of the counting shall be 4. I think that's right too. I've been here (for suitable definitions of "here") for over 25 years!

Posted: **Mon Feb 02, 2026 3:56 pm**

26 this Easter for me. walt was my first debate (about when the Last Supper took place). Come to think of it, I think it was my last as well.

Posted: **Mon Feb 02, 2026 4:37 pm**

I discovered the first version of this board sometime in 1996 or early 97. I was in my early 20s then; I'm in my 50s now. I have spent a lifetime here.

Posted: **Mon Feb 02, 2026 5:55 pm**

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 12:55 pm I am not going to be dragged into a pm conversation over the Poem to the Man God or anything else so please stop sending them to me.

First, being the recipient of a message is not inherently being forced into a conversation, as the receiver—that would be you—retains the autonomy to ignore, delay, or terminate the interaction. While receiving a message is an imposition on attention, true conversation requires mutual, voluntary participation.

Second, you've been responding to most of my PMs about The Poem of the Man-God. Why did you ignore a couple of them, one being the last one?

Third, like I said in one of my PMs to you, I'd prefer to confront opposition regarding The Poem of the Man-God publicly, but you personally disallowed that from happening by locking my thread about it, but not before engaging in selective censorship, i.e., removing links and quotes from my posts, except the ones by others, including your own.

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 12:55 pmFrankly I stopped reading when you claimed to be the first and only member to bring this up.

No, you didn't. People just say things like that in an attempt to save face over being unable to refute what they falsely asserted to not have read.

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 12:55 pmPerhaps you are unaware that though this board may appear relatively new it is the I think 4th (original-"new board"-Ave Maria Radio era-now this one) home this community has had. It's been about 30 years that many of us have been together. Unfortunately much of our history is gone, so maybe you didn't know (though I do believe I mention it in the Welcome thread....)

Anyhoo...I stand by what I said. We have btdt on this subject and are not interested in it.

What I am unaware of is any evidence in support of your claims that you and other members on this forum have already discussed The Poem of the Man-God over the course of years, and would be beating a dead horse to do so again. Therefore, as it stands, your claims remain unsupported. And, even if your claims are true, it's irrelevant now, because of your inability to present evidence to support them, and thus, on this "new board", it's as if you and the other members that you're referencing, haven't discussed The Poem of the Man-God already.

Now, if you and others don't want to discuss The Poem of the Man-God, whether again or for the first time, I'll respect your desire. But, I do want to, and with any current or future members who are willing to, as well as reference it. I should be able to do that. But, thus far, you've locked my thread "The Poem of the Man-God — Maria Valtorta", thus disallowing fair and open dialogue about it, but not before removing from the opening post links to arguments, proof, and testimonies in support of it having a supernatural origin, except the content and links by others, including your own, that you believe support your preconceived belief about it, as well as removed from another post content where I reference it in the thread "Eight Beatitudes Or Nine?"

When a forum board administrator acts as a censor or ideologue, as you do, rather than a neutral moderator, it often leads to the degradation of the community, the silencing of diverse viewpoints, and the creation of an "echo chamber". Such environments prioritize the enforcement of specific political, social, or personal beliefs over fostering open discussion, which can lead to user frustration, decreased participation, and, in severe cases, the collapse of the community.

Here are the primary problems associated with such administration:

1. Creation of Echo Chambers and Reduced Diversity of Thought

Homogeneity of Opinion: Biased moderation filters out opposing perspectives, resulting in a community where only one side is represented.

Stifled Debate: When administrators censor views they disagree with, they suppress constructive dialogue and critical thinking, preventing users from engaging with challenging content.

Distorted Norms: Constant exposure to a sanitized, one-sided, or extreme viewpoint can cause users to develop a skewed perception of what is considered mainstream or normal.

2. Erosion of User Trust and Engagement

Loss of Credibility: When moderators remove content based on personal bias rather than clear, consistent rules, they lose the trust of the community.

Dull, "Sanitized" Content: Over-moderation often leads to a "sterile" environment where only uninteresting or safe topics are discussed, causing active users to leave.

Feelings of Disempowerment: Users may feel that their voices do not matter, leading to a loss of interest in contributing to the forum.

3. Unfair Targeting and Harassment

Ideological Purges: Admins with strong ideological agendas may ban or silence users who challenge their worldview, even if those users are not violating any explicit rules.

Selective Enforcement: Rules are often applied inconsistently, punishing dissenting voices while ignoring violations by those who align with the admin's viewpoint.

Marginalization of Specific Groups: Biased, over-zealous moderation can disproportionately affect marginalized voices, preventing them from sharing their experiences.

4. Potential for Community Collapse or Revolt

Mass Exodus: When a community becomes too restrictive, users often leave for platforms with more open, or different, viewpoints.

Retaliation: In some cases, unfairly treated users may engage in revenge actions, such as hacking the site, doxxing, or spreading misinformation to disrupt the forum.

5. Suppression of Information

Anti-intellectualism: By blocking challenging information, administrators prevent their community from learning or correcting misconceptions.

Masking Truth: When only one narrative is allowed, the truth can be obscured, and factual arguments that contradict the admin’s ideology are removed.
In summary, when a forum admin shifts from moderating to censoring, they often destroy the very community they are supposed to maintain by prioritizing ideology over open exchange.

If that's really the type of board administrator you want to be, then say so publicly, here and now, leaving me and the others free to decide if that creates an enriching environment.

Administrator's note: This post has been edited prior to approval to remove links. Usually I would have also removed the entire rant at the bottom. It's just been so long since we've enjoyed such humor I decided to let it go...just this once.
Zeno
Board Administrator

Posted: **Mon Feb 02, 2026 6:12 pm**

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 12:55 pm We have btdt on this subject

My IT department was unavailable (i.e. my 40-something daughter) so I had to Giggle up this term. Maybe I just need to stay home more surfing the web.

Posted: **Mon Feb 02, 2026 7:05 pm**

Zeno, you made the following note at the bottom of my last post:

Administrator's note: This post has been edited prior to approval to remove links

Why did you remove the links to the posts and threads of mine that you selectively censored?

Posted: **Mon Feb 02, 2026 7:06 pm**

Theosis wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 5:55 pm
zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 12:55 pm I am not going to be dragged into a pm conversation over the Poem to the Man God or anything else so please stop sending them to me.
First, being the recipient of a message is not inherently being forced into a conversation, as the receiver—that would be you—retains the autonomy to ignore, delay, or terminate the interaction. While receiving a message is an imposition on attention, true conversation requires mutual, voluntary participation.

Second, you've been responding to most of my PMs about The Poem of the Man-God. Why did you ignore a couple of them, one being the last one?

I told you I don't want to discuss Poem of the Man God. Not by PM. Not out in the open.

The entire content of my pms has been to try keep any conversation out here...

Third, like I said in one of my PMs to you, I'd prefer to confront opposition regarding The Poem of the Man-God publicly, but you personally disallowed that from happening by locking my thread about it, but not before engaging in selective censorship, i.e., removing links and quotes from my posts, except the ones by others, including your own.

The staff of this board have a right to decide what is suitable material. The responses you received are the extent to which the subject you raised will be allowed to be addressed here.

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 12:55 pmFrankly I stopped reading when you claimed to be the first and only member to bring this up.
No, you didn't.

Yes, I did.

People just say things like that in an attempt to save face over being unable to refute what they falsely asserted to not have read.

So you're a mind reader now?

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 12:55 pmPerhaps you are unaware that though this board may appear relatively new it is the I think 4th (original-"new board"-Ave Maria Radio era-now this one) home this community has had. It's been about 30 years that many of us have been together. Unfortunately much of our history is gone, so maybe you didn't know (though I do believe I mention it in the Welcome thread....)

Anyhoo...I stand by what I said. We have btdt on this subject and are not interested in it.
What I am unaware of is any evidence in support of your claims that you and other members on this forum have already discussed The Poem of the Man-God over the course of years, and would be beating a dead horse to do so again. Therefore, as it stands, your claims remain unsupported. And, even if your claims are true, it's irrelevant now, because of your inability to present evidence to support them, and thus, on this "new board", it's as if you and the other members that you're referencing, haven't discussed The Poem of the Man-God already.

I hardly know what to say to this. I am making up the existence of prior boards and/or conversations?

Now, if you and others don't want to discuss The Poem of the Man-God, whether again or for the first time, I'll respect your desire. But, I do want to, and with any current or future members who are willing to, as well as reference it. I should be able to do that.

You are more than welcome to do that. Just not here.

But, thus far, you've locked my thread "The Poem of the Man-God — Maria Valtorta", thus disallowing fair and open dialogue about it, but not before removing from the opening post links to arguments, proof, and testimonies in support of it having a supernatural origin, except the content and links by others, including your own, that you believe support your preconceived belief about it, as well as removed from another post content where I reference it in the thread "Eight Beatitudes Or Nine?"

This board is not your personal soapbox. We aren't interested in discussing the matter. You have no right to demand to be allowed to preach here (because that is what would happen). Sorry.

When a forum board administrator acts as a censor or ideologue, as you do, rather than a neutral moderator,

I never claimed to be neutral, nor am I obligated to be. The staff and I act in what we believe to be in the best interest of the community. If you aren't happy with that you are not being forced to participate.

As for the rest of your rant - as I said that kind of thing isn't usually allowed, but it was funny, and I don't want you to feel the need to pm it to me. I am not going to bother addressing it.

There. You have said your piece. We are still not discussing Poem of the Man God. If you would like to engage in other conversation you are welcome. If not

Posted: **Mon Feb 02, 2026 7:08 pm**

Theosis wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 7:05 pm Zeno, you made the following note at the bottom of my last post:

Administrator's note: This post has been edited prior to approval to remove links
Why did you remove the links to the posts and threads of mine that you selectively censored?

I'm not sure about selectively censored - I intended to get them all. Did I miss one?

Posted: **Mon Feb 02, 2026 8:43 pm**

Here's the original forum from back in 2002: https://web.archive.org/web/20020630224 ... nvert.com/

I recognize at least four current posters on there (including me).

By 2008, the board changed over to use phpBB. You can see that version here: https://web.archive.org/web/20081217025 ... nvert.com/ I recognize (at a quick check) at least five current posters.

Toward the end of 2014, Steve Ray sold the board to Ave Maria radio because maintenance was becoming a headache. For some reason, the Wayback Machine doesn't want to show the pages for it, but it was there.

Eventually, Ave Maria tired of the maintenance as well. Zeno resurrected it in late 2024, as you can see here: https://web.archive.org/web/20241102180 ... om/forums/

The stilldcf name comes from the original board, which was entitled "Defenders of the Catholic Faith".

So, yeah, some of us have been around here (for suitable definitions of here) a long time.

Posted: **Tue Feb 03, 2026 1:02 am**

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 7:06 pm I told you I don't want to discuss Poem of the Man God. Not by PM. Not out in the open.

The entire content of my pms has been to try keep any conversation out here...

Here's the truth everybody:

I referred and linked to The Poem of the Man-God for the first time in the thread "Eight Beatitudes Or Nine?" located in the sub-forum Catholicism 101 post Zeno removed the content within it regarding The Poem of the Man-God.Then, he submitted a post saying, "I edited the above to remove links. We aren't discussing Poem of the Man God here." That's when I PM'd him for the first time asking why he removed that content, and he initially referred me back to his post for the explanation, to which I informed him that his post wasn't an explanation, and thus doesn't answer my question. In reply, he said that due to the controversy surrounding The Poem of the Man-God, it would be inappropriate for it to be discussed in the specific sub-forum Catholicism 101. I replied asking why, but received no response.

Then, I created the thread "The Poem of the Man-God — Maria Valtorta" in the sub-forum The University, where I introduced The Poem of the Man-God, spoke briefly about how it came to be and affected my life, because that is a place for the discussion of books, and Zeno hadn't told me it wouldn't be appropriate, or disallowed, from being discussed there, nor in any other sub-forum, other than Catholicism 101. But, what ended up happening was, after Zeno approved the thread, he moved it to the sub-forum Apologetics without explaining why, then removed from opening postthe links to arguments, proof, and testimonies in support of The Poem of the Man-God having a supernatural origin, but not the quotes and links by others, including his own, that he believes supports his preconceived belief about it, and finally locked the thread. It was because he had prevented me from responding publicly that I PM'd him again, this time addressing his post[ in that thread. Rather than attempt to refute my arguments, he threatened to remove my ability to use the messaging function if I PM'd him again. His exact words were "Please do not send me any more pms. I will have to remove your ability to use the messaging function of the board if you persist." In the same PM, he also referred me to this thread that he had created, and now here we are.

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 7:06 pmYes, I did.

No, you didn't.

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 7:06 pmSo you're a mind reader now?

Don't need to be when you're this predictable.

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 7:06 pmI hardly know what to say to this. I am making up the existence of prior boards and/or conversations?

I said that you're unable to provide evidence in support of your claim that you and other members have already discussed The Poem of the Man-God on prior boards, not that there's no evidence to support the existence of prior boards. And, it is possible that you're lying about you and other members having already discussed The Poem of the Man-God, but, like I said, even if you're speaking the truth, it's irrelevant now, because of your inability to present evidence to support that, and thus, on this new board, it's as if you and those members haven't already discussed The Poem of the Man-God. Now, anyone who doesn't want to discuss The Poem of the Man-God, whether again or for the first time, I respect their desire. But, there are others who will want to discuss and/or reference it, and if they were allowed to do that, it doesn't mean that you or anyone else are obligated to engage with them about it. Therefore, why deny others what you allow yourself: freedom of expression?

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 7:06 pmYou have no right to demand to be allowed to preach here [...]

I didn't demand anything, rather I said that I should be able to discuss with those willing and reference The Poem of the Man-God. Saying "I should be able to do something" is not inherently the same as demanding it, but they are closely related in terms of psychology and communication. While a demand is a, often rigid, requirement for a specific outcome, saying "I should" is usually an internal expression of expectation, pressure, or a personal standard that can sometimes feel like a demand to yourself or others.

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 7:06 pmI never claimed to be neutral, nor am I obligated to be. The staff and I act in what we believe to be in the best interest of the community.

Do you believe it's in the best interest of the community for forum staff members to be censors and/or ideologues? If so, why?

zeno wrote: ↑Mon Feb 02, 2026 7:08 pmI'm not sure about selectively censored - I intended to get them all. Did I miss one?

I said nothing about you missing anything, rather regarding one of my posts above, I asked why you removed from it the links to posts and threads of mine that you censored?

Posted: **Tue Feb 03, 2026 12:56 pm**

This is the final word on this subject.

Most of what you say about our interactions is true except a couple of things you might not be aware of.

First, I am not a "he" so please don't refer to me as such.

Second, between your first attempt to raise the subject in Cath101 (a 100% wholly inappropriate place for that material which should be OBVIOUS to anyone aware of the controversy surrounding it and who read the forum description before posting) and your attempt to put it in another place, I checked with some of the more regular members to see if there was any interest in discussing this again. The answer was "no."

if you post and no one responds that is PREACHING not conversing and in no way will I give you space to do that. I also will not allow you to promote the material by posting links to it. As I already said, anyone interested can look it up.

Furthermore, I don't have to prove to you that we have btdt. This thread has been up for over a day and no one has come in on the other side except you. What does that tell you?

As to why the second post was moved - The University is not a place for debate. This is the place for debate. Thus moved here. No interest in continuing the discussion among board members, so answered and locked. Done, over, please drop it.

Nothing else you said deserves a response.

So...really...final, final word - I will repeat if you would like to participate in other conversations here you are welcome, but there is no interest in Poem of the Man God, and no discussion of it will be allowed in any way shape or form. If that is not acceptable to you no one if forcing you to say.

I will not approve any further argumentative posts from you on this subject. And I repeat, don't pm me about it either or I will be forced to remove that functionality from your account.

Posted: **Tue Feb 03, 2026 1:11 pm**

I would like to add that since you were told what the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith had to say, if you don't accept that, then you don't accept the Magisterium of the Church. That would put you in a position of dissent from official Church teaching, and therefore, you need to examine your thinking, and maybe get a spiritual director to help you.

Posted: **Wed Feb 04, 2026 7:23 am**

zeno wrote: ↑Tue Feb 03, 2026 12:56 pm if you post and no one responds that is PREACHING not conversing and in no way will I give you space to do that.

I agree with your position on the post, but I'm not sure whether you want to press this particular objection. It seems like NormandT in The Pub does a lot of preaching with no replies.

Posted: **Wed Feb 04, 2026 12:54 pm**

He is a priest and a long standing exception going back to the prior board. He is allowed to preach.

Posted: **Wed Feb 04, 2026 1:50 pm**

VeryTas wrote: ↑Wed Feb 04, 2026 7:23 am
zeno wrote: ↑Tue Feb 03, 2026 12:56 pm if you post and no one responds that is PREACHING not conversing and in no way will I give you space to do that.
I agree with your position on the post, but I'm not sure whether you want to press this particular objection. It seems like NormandT in The Pub does a lot of preaching with no replies.

You can do what I do... respond to my own posts. Looks like there's traffic then.

Posted: **Fri Feb 20, 2026 1:51 pm**

p.falk wrote: ↑Wed Feb 04, 2026 1:50 pm You can do what I do... respond to my own posts. Looks like there's traffic then.

If I respond to myself and I don't answer, did I make a sound in the forest?

Posted: **Fri Feb 20, 2026 5:47 pm**

Riverboat wrote: ↑Fri Feb 20, 2026 1:51 pm

Posted: **Mon Feb 23, 2026 11:32 pm**

Riverboat wrote: ↑Fri Feb 20, 2026 1:51 pmIf I respond to myself and I don't answer, did I make a sound in the forest?

Dunno. Depends on whether you are a man or a bear or the woman.

Just read the above. I have absolutely no idea what the poem cited is. And I have no interest in discussing it. I'd rather discuss the poems of the English Romantics.

“She walks in beauty, like the night
Of cloudless climes and starry skies…”

How's that for cold water?

Posted: **Tue Feb 24, 2026 10:32 pm**

Highlander wrote: ↑Mon Feb 23, 2026 11:32 pm I'd rather discuss the poems of the English Romantics.

Now you're talking! That happens to be my favorite genre. I have collections of Coleridge, Blake, and Wordsworth. It doesn't hurt that I have a degree in English and a master's in literature.

The Catholic Message Board

Theosis

Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis

Re: Theosis